Obama embraces Super PACs: Is he “selling out”? Or was it necessary?

A lot of backlash over Obama’s decision to embrace Super PACs and give donors the green light to jump in the game. I don’t believe his decision necessarily “condones” the use of Super PACs – I happen to agree with his campaign that it was a necessary evil and that they had no choice in order to keep the playing field level. Allowing the Republicans alone to utilize Super PACs would be electoral suicide.

The sad truth is it’s sink or swim for politicians in our pay-to-play system. Yes, Obama could have “sent a message” by taking a moral stance and refusing to embrace Super PACs, but unfortunately the vast majority of Americans just aren’t paying attention to the issue. Not to mention the fact that Americans just don’t do well with subtlety. Consequently any kind of “symbolic” message he tried to send would just be lost on them. Right now we need a President who will be sympathetic to the cause of getting money out of politics, and given the choice between Obama and a GOP candidate, Obama wins hands down.

There is lots Obama could do to show that, while he must play by the rules of the game, he recognizes those rules are flawed and he wants to work to change them. Republic Report clearly spells out those options:

Issue an executive order mandating campaign disclosure by government contractors.

Strengthen the Federal Elections Commission.

Use the Securities and Exchange Commission to empower investors with information about corporate political spending

Press for the DISCLOSE Act and other measures to add transparency to the campaigns and elections.

This is going to be a record year for campaign spending thanks to the Citizens United ruling and Super PACs. Obama needs to do everything he can to keep up with his Republican opponent, and we need to do everything we can to get money out of politics so we never have to worry about this issue again!